Commercialization or Engagement: Which Is of More Significance to the U.S. Economy ?
Beginning with the commercialization of genetic engineering (biotechnology) research beginning in the late 1970s and the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act, U.S. university administrators quickly built technology licensing (transfer) offices meant to commercialize inventions made by their researchers. By studying technology transfer in electrical engineering and computer science, statistics and mathematics, scientific instruments, and agriculture, this article demonstrates that biotechnology model does not accurately portray the ways in which most university technology is transferred to society. The application of the biotechnology/technology licensing office model to other university disciplines may stifle the diffusion of technology to society due to undue restrictions in the flow of technology; both from the university to society and, as important, the flow of ideas and resources from society to the university. Finally, it cautions against making wholesale changes in current institutional arrangements on the basis of the current U.S.-centric model based on biotechnology. For European policy-makers, the temptation to follow the U.S biotechnology-derived model may disrupt long-standing and quite successful channels of information transfer, while not bringing the supposed benefits of the U.S. model. This is particularly true because research on European university technology transfer is still at a very early stage
|Date of creation:||13 Jun 2013|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Lönnrotinkatu 4 B, FIN-00120 HELSINKI|
Phone: +358 (0)9 609 900
Fax: +358 (0)9 601 753
Web page: http://www.etla.fi/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Email: |
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Jacobsson, Staffan & Lindholm-Dahlstrand, Åsa & Elg, Lennart, 2013.
"Is the commercialization of European academic R&D weak?—A critical assessment of a dominant belief and associated policy responses,"
Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 874-885.
- Staffan Jacobsson & Asa Lindholm Dahlstrand & Lennart Elg, 2011. "Is the commercialisation of European academic R&D weak? - a critical assessment of a 'dominant belief' and associated policy responses," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1603, European Regional Science Association.
- Scott Shane, 2002. "Selling University Technology: Patterns from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 122-137, January.
- Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
- Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard C. Levin & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1993. "On the Sources and Significance of Interindustry Differences in Technological Opportunities," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1052, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Shahid Yusuf & Kaoru Nabeshima, 2007. "How Universities Promote Economic Growth," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 6631, July.
- Albert N. Link & Donald S. Siegel & Barry Bozeman, 2007. "An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 641-655, August.
- Albert N. Link & Donald S. Siegel & Barry Bozeman, 2006. "An Empirical Analysis of the Propensity of Academics to Engage in Informal University Technology Transfer," Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics 0610, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Economics.
- Baldini, Nicola & Grimaldi, Rosa & Sobrero, Maurizio, 2006. "Institutional changes and the commercialization of academic knowledge: A study of Italian universities' patenting activities between 1965 and 2002," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 518-532, May.
- Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
- Ashish Arora & Andrea Fosfuri & Alfonso Gambardella, 2004. "Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262511819, July.
- Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
- Grimaldi, Rosa & Kenney, Martin & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike, 2011. "30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1045-1057, October.
- Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rif:wpaper:13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Kaija Hyvönen-Rajecki)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.